Collagen supplements are such a scam like just eat some chicharrones
Voted wettest sounding video on tumblr
Me: wettest sound?
*turns on sound*
Me: oh. Yeah. That’s a wet sounding video
I need an umbrella to watch this video
All useful things turn to shit when you privatize them.
Basically, any politician talking about privatization of any public service should be taken as a glowing neon sign reading “I’M CORRUPT AND I WANT TO MAKE MY CRONIES RICHER AT YOUR EXPENSE”
the best thing about firefox is that it kills youtube autoplay
second best thing about firefox is it allows screenshots and screen sharing from netflix and other streaming platforms which prevent those on most browsers
this post was a psyop to get people to switch to firefox and i'm so glad it's working
in the newest update you can now right click to take a screenshot of any video/show/movie and it enters a free crop mode that removes the UI/play bar & buttons on the video so on sites like youtube where the play bar stays up when the media is paused you can take full screenshots anyway!
with the UK government hosting what could be a 6-billion-pound funeral despite extreme public housing/heating crisis, as the queen’s death occurs during the same week as the 49th anniversary of the 11 September 1973 Chilean coup led by Augusto Pinochet:
recall how, when Pinochet was arrested in London in 1998 for charges including “suspected genocide” and 194 counts of killing Spanish citizens, the UK released him and let him return to Chile after letting him spend 18 months living at a beautiful palace-like private estate at a posh high-end country club. surrounded by the golf club and the estates of CEOs and entrepreneurs, Pinochet paid 10,000 pounds per month in rent. this was the first British town outside of London where the average sale price of a home exceeded 1 million pounds. during this time, Margaret Thatcher told the 1999 Conservative party conference, about Pinochet’s house arrest: “I don’t know when or how this tragedy will end, but we will fight on for as long as it takes to see Senator Pinochet returned safely to his own country. The British people still believe in loyalty to their friends.” and then Thatcher gifted Pinochet a bottle of fine liquor with the note: “Scotch is one British institution that will never let you down.”
Me when I’m eating and savoring good food: “Thank you, Andes. Thank you, cloud forest of the high Andes, perpetually shrouded in mist. Thank you, dense tropical rainforest of the upper Amazon along the rugged eastern slopes of the Andes. Thank you, globally-rare Mediterranean-climate chaparral biome of the western slopes of the Andes and your strange desert plants and fog oases. Thank you, western slope of the Andes, for the globally-rare temperate rainforest biome of the Valdivian fjords. Thank you, Andes, for supplying the headwaters of the rivers of the Gran Chaco and Patagonia. Thank you to the dazzling and unparalleled biodiversity of the tropical Andes, where glaciers exist at the planet’s equator, and creatures of both alpine ice and tropical heat can live alongside each other. Thank you, orographic precipitation of the western Andes, for providing some of the highest rainfall rates in the world, which feeds the Choco-Darien bioregion’s rainforest isolated on the Pacific coast. Thank you for the altiplano of the Andes. Thank you for the altitudinal zonation of the Andean slopes, and the ecological diversity at varying elevations that this zonation nourishes. Thank you for the Titicaca water frog. Thank you for the kodkod. Thank you for the incredible number of endemic species in the Andes and the dozens of unique species of hummingbirds. Thank you to Andean condors, the spectacled bear, the mountain tapir, guanaco, vicuna, and the Andean mountain cat. Thank you to the people of the Andes. Thank you, Andean people, for cultivating this food over millennia. Thank you, Andes and Andean people, for chocolate, peanuts, tomato, quinoa, cashews, and over 4,000 distinct varieties of potatoes.”
A 1998 Guardian article which is surprisingly informative...
I'm posting it in full:
"'It is the firm and continuing policy that Allende be overthrown by a coup… Please review all your present and possibly new activities to include propaganda, black operations, surfacing of intelligence or disinformation, personal contacts, or anything else your imagination can conjure…'
'Eyes only, restricted handling, secret' message. To US station chief, Santiago. From CIA headquarters. 16 October 1970.
You would be wrong to assume this plan for mayhem was another manifestation of the Cold War between the 'free world' and communism. Much more was at stake: Pepsi-Cola's market share and other matters closer to the heart of corporate America.
In exclusive interviews with The Observer last week, the former US Ambassador to Chile, Edward Korry, told the story in - and behind - these and other top secret CIA, State Department and White House cables recently released by the National Security Archives. Korry filled in gaps in the story by describing cables still classified, and disclosing information censored in papers now available under the US Freedom of Information Act.
Korry, who served Presidents Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon, told how US companies, from cola to copper, using the CIA as an international debt collection agency and investment security force.
Indeed, the October 1970 plot against Chile's President-elect Salvador Allende, using CIA 'sub-machine guns and ammo', was the direct result of a plea for action a month earlier by Donald Kendall, chairman of PepsiCo, in two telephone calls to the company's former lawyer, President Richard Nixon.
Kendall arranged for the owner of the company's Chilean bottling operation to meet National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger on September 15. Hours later, Nixon called in his CIA chief, Richard Helms, and, according to Helms's handwritten notes, ordered the CIA to prevent Allende's inauguration.
But this is only half the story, according to Korry. He claims the US conspiracy against Allende's election did not begin with Nixon, but originated - and read no further if you cherish the myth of Camelot - with John F Kennedy.
In 1963, Allende was heading towards victory in Chile's presidential election. Kennedy decided his political creation, Eduardo Frei, the late father of Chile's current President, Eduardo Frei Ruiz-Tagle, could win the election by buying it. Kennedy left it to his brother, Bobby, the Attorney-General, to put the plan into action.
The Kennedys cajoled US multinationals into pouring $2 billion into Chile, a nation of only 8 million people. This was not benign investment, but what Korry calls 'a mutually corrupting' web of business deals, many questionable, for which the US government would arrange guarantees and insurance.
In return, the American-based firms kicked back millions of dollars to pay for well over half of Frei's successful election campaign. By the end of this process, Americans had gobbled up more than 85 per cent of Chile's hard-currency earning industries.
The US government, the guarantor of these investments, committed extraordinary monetary, intelligence and political resources to protect them. Several business-friendly US government front organisations and operatives were sent into Chile -including the American Institute for Free Labor Development, infamous for sabotaging militant trade unions.
Then, in 1970, US investments, both financial and political, faced unexpected jeopardy. A split between Chile's centre and right-wing parties permitted an alliance of communists, socialists and radicals - uniting behind the socialist Allende - to finish the presidential election 1 per cent ahead of his nearest rival.
That October, Korry, a hardened anti-communist, hatched an off-the-wall scheme to block Allende's inauguration and return Frei to power. To promote his own bloodless intrigues, the ambassador claims he 'back-channeled' a message to Washington warning against military actions that might lead to 'another Bay of Pigs' fiasco. (Korry retains a copy of this still-classified cable.)
But Korry's prescient message only angered Kissinger, who had already authorised the Pepsi-instigated coup, scheduled for the following week. Kissinger ordered Korry to fly in secret to Washington that weekend for a dressing-down. Still not knowing about the CIA plan, Korry told Kissinger in a White House corridor that 'only a madman' would plot with Chile's ultra-right generals.
As if on cue, Kissinger opened the door to the Oval Office to introduce Nixon. Nixon - who described his ambassador as 'soft in the head' - did agree that, tactically, a coup could not yet succeed. A last-minute cable to the CIA to delay action was too late: the conspirators kidnapped and killed Chile's pro- democracy Armed Forces Chief, Rene Schneider. Public revulsion at this crime assured Allende's confirmation by Chile's Congress.
Even if the US president's sense of realpolitik may have disposed him to a modus vivendi with Allende - Korry's alternative if his Frei gambit failed - Nixon faced intense pressure from his political donors in business who were panicked by Allende's plans to nationalise their operations.
In particular, the president was aware that the owner of Chile's phone company, ITT Corporation, was illegally channelling funds into Republican Party coffers. Nixon could not ignore ITT - and ITT wanted blood. An ITT board member, ex-CIA director John McCone, pledged Kissinger $1 million in support of CIA action to prevent Allende from taking office.
Separately, Anaconda Copper and other multinationals, under the aegis of David Rockefeller's Business Group for Latin America, offered $500,000 to buy influence with Chilean congressmen to reject confirmation of Allende's victory. But Korry wouldn't play. While he knew nothing of the ITT demands on the CIA, he got wind of, and vetoed, the cash for payoffs from Anaconda and the other firms.
Korry, speaking last week from his home in Charlotte, North Carolina, disclosed that he even turned in to the Chilean authorities an army major who planned to assassinate Allende - unaware the officer was linked to the CIA plotters.
Once Allende took office, Korry sought accommodation with the new government, conceding that expropriations of the telephone and copper concessions (actually begun under Frei) were necessary to disentangle Chile from seven decades of 'incestuous and corrupting' dependency.
US corporations didn't see it that way. While pretending to bargain in good faith, they pushed the White House to impose a clandestine embargo on Chile's economy. But in case all schemes failed, ITT, claims Korry, paid $500,000 to someone referred to in their intercepted cables as 'The Fat Man'. Korry identified him as Jacobo Schaulsohn, Allende's ally on a committee set up to compensate firms whose property had been expropriated.
It was not money well spent. In 1971, when Allende learned of the corporate machinations against his government, he refused the compensation. It was this - the Chilean leader's failure to pay, not his perceived allegiance to the hammer and sickle - that sealed his fate.
The State Department pulled Korry out of Santiago in October 1971. On his return to the US, he advised the government's Overseas Private Investment Corporation to deny Anaconda Copper and ITT compensation for their seized property. Korry argued that, like someone who burns down their own home, ITT could not claim against insurance for an expropriation the company had itself provoked by violating Chilean law.
Confidentially, he recommended criminal charges against ITT's top brass, including, implicitly, chief executive Harold Geneen, for falsifying the insurance claims and lying to Congress.
Given powerful evidence against the companies, OPIC at first refused them compensation, and the Justice Department indicted two mid-level ITT operatives for perjury. But ultimately, the companies received their money and the executives went free on the grounds that they were working with the full co-operation of the CIA - and higher.
In September 1970 in a secret cable to the US Secretary of State, ambassador Korry quotes Jean Genet: 'Even if my hands were full of truths, I wouldn't open it for others.' Why open his hand now? At 77, one supposes there is a desire to correct history. He says only that it is important to take out of the shadows what he calls - optimistically - the last case of US 'dollar diplomacy'.
ideally jk rowling will be next
every reblog is -1hp for the terf
"What is monarchy? From whence does it derive its sanction? What has been its gift to humanity? Monarchy is a survival of the tyranny imposed by the hand of greed and treachery upon the human race in the darkest and most ignorant days of our history. It derives its only sanction from the sword of the marauder, and the helplessness of the producer, and its gifts to humanity are unknown, save as they can be measured in the pernicious examples of triumphant and shameless iniquities.
Every class in society save royalty, and especially British royalty, has through some of its members contributed something to the elevation of the race. But neither in science, nor in art, nor in literature, nor in exploration, nor in mechanical invention, nor in humanising of laws, nor in any sphere of human activity has a representative of British royalty helped forward the moral, intellectual or material improvement of mankind. But that royal family has opposed every forward move, fought every reform, persecuted every patriot, and intrigued against every good cause. Slandering every friend of the people, it has befriended every oppressor. Eulogised today by misguided clerics, it has been notorious in history for the revolting nature of its crimes. Murder, treachery, adultery, incest, theft, perjury — every crime known to man has been committed by some one or other of the race of monarchs from whom King George [V] is proud to trace his descent.
His blood
Has crept through scoundrels since the flood.
We will not blame him for the crimes of his ancestors if he relinquishes the royal rights of his ancestors; but as long as he claims their rights, by virtue of descent, then, by virtue of descent, he must shoulder the responsibility for their crimes."
- James Connolly, from "James Connolly: The British Monarchy Is an Affront to Democracy." Jacobin, 8 September 2022.
The more I see my media telling me to mourn, the angrier I get.
I never knew this woman. The only personal impact she had on my life was when one of her relatives died or married, I would get a day off school. I never knew Elizabeth, I knew the Queen. The Queen who wore a crown coated in diamonds stolen from other countries, a crown drenched in the blood her family collected over lifetimes of imperialism.
I should not be told to mourn a 96 year old woman who lived a life of obsene wealth and experience and died surrounded by loved ones, aided by the best healthcare in the world.
The crown disgusts me and anyone who wears it is not someone I mourn. The Queen and her family earnt none of their influence, they earnt none of my respect, and I do not mourn them
and yknow what i also don’t like the idea that abusers are these like. horrible monsters and there’s something ~wrong with them~ cuz no “normal” person could ever do such a thing like. my abusers are normal people. not even particularly bad people, really, aside from… well, yknow. there’s not some special ingredient that makes abusers abusers. they’re just people, doing fucked up things. you wouldn’t know it from looking at them, there’s no one specific reason they do what they do. it’s weird to try and like… explain it all away like that.
and actually yknow what i’ve always hated the dehumanization of abusers or bad people or whatever cuz like. no! they aren’t monsters, they’re people! this is what humans have the capacity to do! there’s nothing special about it! don’t try to distance ‘nice, normal folks’ from ‘monsters’ cuz we’re the same goddamn thing; we all have free will and the ability to choose how we act and some people choose fucked up stuff and that’s human, unfortunately
Saying that abusers are less than human or that there is some inherent pathology to them makes the world less safe. Because if abusers are less than human, you can’t acknowledge that your beloved best friend is neglecting his children. You can’t acknowledge that your mother emotionally abused you. You can’t take the accusation of domestic violence against your role model seriously. You can’t acknowledge that your girlfriend is financially abusing you. Because they are human, and you know them, so they can’t be unhuman abusers. And they aren’t unhuman. But they are abusers.
A woman with no mental illness can come home and hit her children. A man with a perfectly healthy childhood can manipulate his employees into working overtime with no pay. A woman who is respected in her community can commit a rape. A man who treats most patients perfectly can be medically abusive to others.
Abuse is not a pathology. It is not a function of inhumanity. It is not inevitable. If it was any of those things, it would be morally neutral in the way that a hurricane is, something that you just have to get potential victims out of the way of. Instead, abuse is an action or set of actions that the person chooses to take, and could have chosen not to take. That’s the whole reason that abuse is a moral wrong: that abusers could have chosen otherwise.
Most importantly?
There is nothing separating you, the person reading this, from being an abuser, except for the choice to be careful and kind to others. Not if you were abused. Not if you have little societal power. Not if you just really don’t want to be one. There is no immutable fact about you that makes you immune to abusing others. There are only the choices that you make in how you interact with other human beings.
Anyone can choose to be an abuser. Anyone can choose not to be one.
HERE WE ARE, IN THE OUROBOROS, DOING IT AGAIN. HOPING SOME DAY THIS DANMED CYCLE ENDS.